[hibernate-dev] Breaking JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform backwards compatibility

[Scott Marlow]

On Sat, May 26, 2018, 6:05 PM Scott Marlow <smarlow at redhat.com> wrote:

> Or, maybe we should just remove the JBOSS_TM_CLASS_NAME
> + JBOSS_UT_CLASS_NAME class references and instead JNDI lookup using the
> standard JBoss TM/UT JNDI names.
>

This wouldn't work for standard alone mode, as there wouldn't be any jndi
services.  Guess, we are stuck with using class name references.


> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Scott Marlow <smarlow at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne at hibernate.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Scott,
>>>
>>> I see you changed JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform to use a new API in WildFly;
>>>
>>
>> More that in WildFly 13, applications shouldn't use the Arjuna TM classes
>> directly anymore.  The WildFly Transaction Client wraps the Arjuna TM and
>> maintains correct TX status.
>>
>>
>>> this breaks all existing applications using a generic "JBoss -
>>> standalone" platform which isn't using the very latest WildFly.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, thinking more about this, also broken, are any ORM 5.1.x
>> applications that depend on JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform to choose the
>> WildFly TM.  JPA container managed applications won't have this problem.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I see that in many cases this type is auto-detected - and while
>>> JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform causes an exception this is swallowed by
>>> the HibernatePersistenceProvider as any exception is only mentioned at
>>> debug level (line 61).
>>>
>>> So two questions:
>>>  - could this be reverted and you introduce some new-gen
>>> WildflyStandAloneJtaPlatform instead?
>>>
>>
>> Not sure, since the WildFly Transaction Client (WFTC) module is also in
>> earlier WF releases.  I'm not exactly sure of when the WFTC TM replaces
>> Arjuna TM.  David, is that new for WF13?
>>
>> We can get more correct in ORM 5.3.x to align with WF 13, but not sure
>> about ORM 5.1 JBossStandAloneJtaPlatform still referencing Arjuna TM
>> directly.  Seems like that is also a problem.
>>
>>
>>>  - bootstrap exceptions: may I change those to error level?
>>>
>>
>> No idea.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sanne
>>>
>>
>>
>